Showing posts with label cyberwar. Show all posts
Showing posts with label cyberwar. Show all posts

Sunday, 20 March 2011

US cyber war defences 'very thin', Pentagon warns

Battle map on screen US officials say government and private systems are attacked millions of times per day

The US military lacks the people and resources to defend the country adequately from concerted cyber attacks, the head of the Pentagon's cyber command has warned.

"We are very thin, and a crisis would quickly stress our cyber forces," Gen Keith Alexander told Congress.
The US says government systems are attacked millions of times a day.

Disputes over budgets are holding up a new cyber protection system ordered by the Department of Homeland Security.

However, some argue the threat of cyber warfare is greatly exaggerated.
'Potential adversaries'
Gen Alexander, head of the US Defence Department's Cyber Command, told a Congressional Committee that he would mark as a "C" the military's ability to protect Pentagon networks, although he acknowledged improvements in recent years.

"We are finding that we do not have the capacity to do everything we need to accomplish. To put it bluntly, we are very thin, and a crisis would quickly stress our cyber forces," he said.

"We cannot afford to allow cyberspace to be a sanctuary where real and potential adversaries can marshal forces and capabilities to use against us and our allies. This is not a hypothetical danger."

US officials say cyber criminals, terrorists and other nations are getting better at penetrating state and private networks, whether to spy, to steal data or damage critical infrastructure.

But speaking last month, leading security expert Bruce Schneier told the BBC that the emotive rhetoric around "cyber warfare" did not match the reality.

"What we are seeing is not cyber war but an increasing use of war-like tactics and that is what is confusing us. We don't have good definitions of what cyber war is, what it looks like and how to fight it," Mr Schneier said.

[BBC]

Monday, 28 February 2011

We are living on strange "Cyberwar times"

In the after-crisis of the Stuxnet worm, Governments around the world are mobilizing to be better prepared against CyberThreats and CyberWar.

It's becoming clear, more and more that groups pf individuals with a lot of knowledge, time and motivation can do harm against economies, healthcare, utilities and other systems, being responsible (who knows?) for the collapse of a country.

We already had, in the past, cases of well succeeded CyberAttacks that collapsed a country information structure and paralyzed it for a while. We can remember of:
  • 2007 CyberAttakcs on Estonia
  • 2007 CyberAttacks against Syria Radar Infrastructure
  • 2008 CyberAttacks on Georgia
  • 2010 Stuxnet Worm
Based on this kind of attack, in 2009, President Barack Obama declared America’s digital infrastructure to be a "strategic national asset," and in May 2010 the Pentagon set up its new U.S. Cyber Command.
Other governments are doing the same.

We can predict "or guess" that soon or later, Telecommunication and utilities companies will have military network devices tapped or deployed in-line in their network being monitored and managed by military personal that in case of a threat will analyze, mitigate, block or even shutdown traffic.

It's kind on natural to me. Internet is evolving. Security is at the top of many people agendas.

Deploy additional protection for strategic points is an smart course of action.

The question is:

How far we would go in to the "hobbit hole"?. Will these systems be used only for defense?

Can countries like Egypt use those "defense technologies" to shut down the voice of people like they did days ago?

I hope not.

But we should keep an eye on it.

Just in case.

By the way, Egypt shut down their DNS Servers and stopped advertising BGP routes. The basic stuff, they did not used any "out of this world technology" like our press stated on some news.

[ISC2]

Sunday, 20 February 2011

A civil perspective on cybersecurity

From Wired: Threat Level


"How important is cyberspace? It is hardly possible to overstate it. The internet is an engine of immense wealth creation, a force for openness, transparency, innovation and freedom. Without it, generators stop turning, phones fall silent, critical goods sit on loading docks. Without confidence in the integrity of financial data or health information, the economy trembles. Without connectivity, tens of thousands of communities disappear from view; a deployed solider cannot see her daughter’s swim victory, a multiple sclerosis patient is unable to confer with others about the latest medications, and first responders face an unknown chemical spill untethered.
Cyberspace functions as the very endoskeleton of modern life. So it’s no surprise that when bad actors emerge to exploit or threaten it — whether profit-driven criminals, electronic saboteurs or international espionage rings — there’s a temptation to define the threat in the strongest and simplest terms. These days, some observers are pounding out a persistent and mounting drumbeat of war, calling for preparing the battlefield, even saying that the United States is already fully into a “cyberwar,” that it is, in fact, losing."

To continue reading this article: http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2011/02/dhs-op-ed/

Cyberwar Issues not likely to be addressed until after a catastrophe

It sounds like the US will likely wait for a catastrophic event, with serious consequences to the economy or in terms of loss of life, and then overreact rather than plan ahead and get a cyberwarfare policy in place ahead of such an event happening.

Espionage and information theft alone don't qualify as cyberwarfare, but destruction of data or systems does qualify, but to designate the latter as an act of war depends on the scale and severity of the attack.

Read the full article at Wired: http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2011/02/cyberwar-issues-likely-to-be-addressed-only-after-a-catastrophe/

World leaders meet to lay down cyberwar 'rules of engagement'

At a meeting of world leaders on the 4th of February the rules of engagement under which cyber-weapons can be deployed was discussed.

The influential EastWest Institute presented proposals for the cyberspace equivalent of the Geneva Convention at the Munich Security Conference, which included on it's agenda for the first time this year a debate on cybersecurity.

Read the full article at The Register: http://www.theregister.co.uk/2011/02/04/cyberwar_rules_of_engagement/